Search

Rationale: Defining lung recruitability is needed for safe positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) selection in mechanically ventilated patients. However, there is no simple bedside method including both assessment of recruitability and risks of overdistension as well as personalized PEEP titration. Objectives: To describe the range of recruitability using electrical impedance tomography (EIT), effects of PEEP on recruitability, respiratory mechanics and gas exchange, and a method to select optimal EIT-based PEEP. Methods: This is the analysis of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) from an ongoing multicenter prospective physiological study including patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome of different causes. EIT, ventilator data, hemodynamics, and arterial blood gases were obtained during PEEP titration maneuvers. EIT-based optimal PEEP was defined as the crossing point of the overdistension and collapse curves during a decremental PEEP trial. Recruitability was defined as the amount of modifiable collapse when increasing PEEP from 6 to 24 cm H2O (ΔCollapse24–6). Patients were classified as low, medium, or high recruiters on the basis of tertiles of ΔCollapse24–6. Measurements and Main Results: In 108 patients with COVID-19, recruitability varied from 0.3% to 66.9% and was unrelated to acute respiratory distress syndrome severity. Median EIT-based PEEP differed between groups: 10 versus 13.5 versus 15.5 cm H2O for low versus medium versus high recruitability (P, 0.05). This approach assigned a different PEEP level from the highest compliance approach in 81% of patients. The protocol was well tolerated; in four patients, the PEEP level did not reach 24 cm H2O because of hemodynamic instability. Conclusions: Recruitability varies widely among patients with COVID-19. EIT allows personalizing PEEP setting as a compromise between recruitability and overdistension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinicians use several measures to ascertain whether individual patients will tolerate liberation from mechanical ventilation, including the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI).Research Question: Given varied use of different thresholds, patient populations, and measurement characteristics, how well does RSBI predict successful extubation?Study Design and Methods: We searched six databases from inception through September 2019 and selected studies reporting the accuracy of RSBI in the prediction of successful extubation. We extracted study data and assessed quality independently and in duplicate.Results: We included 48 studies involving RSBI measurements of 10,946 patients. Pooled sensitivity for RSBI of < 105 in predicting extubation success was moderate (0.83 [95% CI, 0.78-0.87], moderate certainty), whereas specificity was poor (0.58 [95% CI, 0.49-0.66], moderate certainty) with diagnostic ORs (DORs) of 5.91 (95% CI, 4.09-8.52). RSBI thresholds of < 80 or 80 to 105 yielded similar sensitivity, specificity, and DOR. These findings were consistent across multiple subgroup analyses reflecting different patient characteristics and operational differences in RSBI measurement.Interpretation: As a stand-alone test, the RSBI has moderate sensitivity and poor specificity for predicting extubation success. Future research should evaluate its role as a permissive criterion to undergo a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) for patients who are at intermediate pretest probability of passing an SBT.Trial Registry: PROSPERO; No.: CRD42020149196; URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mechanical ventilation practices in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have progressed with a growing understanding of the disease pathophysiology. Paramount to the care of affected patients is the delivery of lung-protective mechanical ventilation which prioritizes tidal volume and plateau pressure limitation. Lung protection can probably be further enhanced by scaling target tidal volumes to the specific respiratory mechanics of individual patients. The best procedure for selecting optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS remains uncertain; several relevant issues must be considered when selecting PEEP, particularly lung recruitability. Noninvasive ventilation must be used with caution in ARDS as excessively high respiratory drive can further exacerbate lung injury; newer modes of delivery offer promising approaches in hypoxemic respiratory failure. Airway pressure release ventilation offers an alternative approach to maximize lung recruitment and oxygenation, but clinical trials have not demonstrated a survival benefit of this mode over conventional ventilation strategies. Rescue therapy with high-frequency oscillatory ventilation is an important option in refractory hypoxemia. Despite a disappointing lack of benefit (and possible harm) in patients with moderate or severe ARDS, possibly due to lung hyperdistention and right ventricular dysfunction, high-frequency oscillation may improve outcome in patients with very severe hypoxemia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are designed to simulate conditions after extubation, and it is essential to understand the physiologic impact of different methods.Objectives: We conducted a systematic review and pooled measures reflecting patient respiratory effort among studies comparing SBT methods in a meta-analysis.Methods: We searched Medline, Excerpta Medica Database, and Web of Science from inception to January 2016 to identify randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials reporting physiologic measurements of respiratory effort (pressure-time product) or work of breathing during at least two SBT techniques. Secondary outcomes included the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI), and effort measured before and after extubation. The quality of physiologic measurement and research design was appraised for each study. Outcomes were analyzed using ratio of means.Measurements and Main Results: Among 4,138 citations, 16 studies (n = 239) were included. Compared with T-piece, pressure support ventilation significantly reduced work by 30% (ratio of means [RoM], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.86), effort by 30% (RoM, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.82), and RSBI by 20% (RoM, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.75-0.86). Continuous positive airway pressure had significantly lower pressure-time product by 18% (RoM, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.999) compared with T-piece, and reduced RSBI by 16% (RoM, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.95). Studies comparing SBTs with the postextubation period demonstrated that pressure support induced significantly lower effort and RSBI; T-piece reduced effort, but not the work, compared with postextubation. Work, effort, and RSBI measured while intubated on the ventilator with continuous positive airway pressure of 0 cm H2O were no different than extubation.Conclusions: Pressure support reduces respiratory effort compared with T-piece. Continuous positive airway pressure of 0 cm H2O and T-piece more accurately reflect the physiologic conditions after extubation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are associated with postoperative mortality and prolonged hospital stay. Although intraoperative mechanical ventilation (MV) is a risk factor for PPCs, strategies addressing weaning from MV are understudied. In this systematic review, we evaluated weaning strategies and their effects on postoperative pulmonary outcomes. Our protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022379145). Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials and observational studies of adults weaned from MV in the operating room. Primary outcomes included atelectasis and oxygenation; secondary outcomes included lung volume changes and PPCs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB2) tool, and quality of evidence with the GRADE framework. Screening identified 14 randomised controlled trials including 1719 patients; seven studies were limited to the weaning phase and seven included interventions not restricted to the weaning phase. Strategies combining pressure support ventilation (PSV) with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and low fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO 2) improved atelectasis, oxygenation, and lung volumes. Low FiO 2 improved atelectasis and oxygenation but might not improve lung volumes. A fixed-PEEP strategy led to no improvement in oxygenation or atelectasis; however, individualised PEEP with low FiO 2 improved oxygenation and might be associated with reduced PPCs. Half of included studies are of moderate or high risk of bias; the overall quality of evidence is low. There is limited research evaluating weaning from intraoperative MV. Based on low-quality evidence, PSV, individualised PEEP, and low FiO 2 may be associated with reduced postoperative pulmonary outcomes. PROSPERO (CRD42022379145). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]